Legalizing Euthanasia in India

Research Proposal

Working title: Legalizing Euthanasia in India.

Introduction

Topic and General Significance:

  Philosopher Helga Kuhse (1992) points out that 'Euthanasia' is a combination of two Greek words that are 'eu' and 'thanatos', which literally means, 'a good death'. Today, 'euthanasia' generally means the act of providing a good death - 'mercy killing,' where one person, A, ends the life of another person, B, for the sake of B. Euthanasia is of two types mainly. Active euthanasia and Passive euthanasia. Like suicide, euthanasia is illegal in many countries, while some legalized Passive euthanasia alone, very few have legalized both.The bottom line of Euthanasia is to put an end to the constant suffering of person suffering from terminal disease.  India comes under the countries who legalized only Passive Euthanasia and not Active Euthanasia. Being a democratic country with almost 1.3 billion people residing in it (IMF, 2016), Euthanasia has always been a debatable topic in India. The argument of Euthanasia appeals to many in terms of emotion, but according to me, the act of euthanasia should not be legalized because analyzing countries which legalized it, it can lead to various critical issues in the country.

Research Question:

• Why should Active euthanasia not be legalized in India? What might be the drawbacks of legalizing it?

Thesis: 

• Active Euthanasia shouldn’t be legalized because legalizing it will wipe out the hopes and strength that a patient with terminal illness require and it will encourage them to lean towards the choice of having death and give away the courage to fight for life. Encouraging Euthanasia will also lead to the discouragement of finding new cures to complex and incurable diseases.

Key terms:

• Euthanasia is defined as the act of giving a good death to a person for their own sake as a result of any terminal disease (Kuhse,1992). Active Euthanasia refers to a physician involving in an act to end a patient's life. Passive Euthanasia refers to the act of withholding or withdrawing treatment necessary to maintain life (Sinha, Basu & Sarkhel, 2012).  While Passive Euthanasia is legalized in India, Active Euthanasia is not. And hence it has always been a topic of discussion among the public.

Discussion of Source Material

1. This book gives a very detailed explanation to Euthanasia and in a way, exposes how the Dutch doctors are in denial of the consequences of it. Keown (2002) points out that “peculiarly narrow definition of euthanasia” as “voluntary active euthanasia” gives an “unduly restrictive perception” of the extent of euthanasia. Refuting against the legalization of Euthanasia in Dutch, Keown describes about a case study and supports his argument using the statistics. This article will be used in the research paper to describe Euthanasia and its history in a very detailed manner and also to point out the consequences brought about by Euthanasia to the countries like Holland which legalized it.

1. The thoughts and ideology of Mohandas Karmchandh Gandhi were an inspiration to many all over the world and without any doubt in his own home country that is, India. In a nation where he is considered as the father of the nation, people consider his opinion seriously and think twice before taking a decision confliction his advice. This article points out Gandhi's critical response on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. Gandhi believed that as long as care can be extended to a dying patient, his or her suffering could be relieved (Geilen, 2012) . Such deep observations developed by Gandhi and his influence over the country could be used to strengthen and promote the further development of palliative care in India. This part of the article, where Gandhi’s observation which refutes the act of euthanasia can be used to promote my argument.

1. Considering the therapies available can be used to drift of a patient from the Idea of euthanasia, our main goal should be to get the patient out of the loop of the terminal disease. Supporting euthanasia, would create a dead end in finding a cure for many terminal diseases and doctors may not even bother finding cure for them as now there will always be an option to choose (death) if nothing works out. Information on the treatment of a patient is given to them by the Doctors, and eventually the decision in favor of euthanasia is made considering that information, hence Doctors are given more power and at the same time considered less liable because of the Voluntary euthanasia legislation (Saunders, 1994). This article discusses the points raised before the Government of the Northern Territory of Australia in 1994 which in fact without any doubt will be highly credible and will be of great help to back up my arguments against Active euthanasia.

1. Being a doctor is not an easy job, infact no job is easy. But unlike most who deal with paper works, being a doctor you are dealing with the lives of the public at the same time you are also one of them. Hence you are able to understand the one you are treating in both emotional and medical way. So it is not easy for a doctor when it comes to patient suffering from a terminal illness.  Because, considering a common man in India, when you are involoved in such a serious matter. You are influenced by many aspects like religion, emotion, maybe blind believes and at the end influenced by logic in a way too. Hence it is not easy for the doctors too perform such an act of mercy killing. This article consist data acquired from interview of doctors and describes their view on such issues. All doctors reported situations where the question of withdrawal of treatment was experienced as the worst part of their job (Miljeteig&Norheim, 2006). This article will be used to back my arguments from a doctor's point of view from the data provided.
2. In various parts of the world it is seen that Doctors prefer Euthanasia comparatively more than any other individuals, but among doctors they are a minority group. This study describes the results received after a conducting a survey by handing over questionnaire consisting of case studies to doctors in India and Pakistan. This study will be used in my paper to use the statistics and will support the counter against my argument.
3. This study showcases the attitudes of doctors in southern part of India towards            euthanasia and the possible reasons which influence these attitudes. A cross-sectional survey of 213 doctors working at a tertiary care hospital was conducted. The theory of euthanasia was supported by the majority of the respondents. It was found out that euthanasia was mainly considered for being the reason for relief from unbearable pain and suffering. Those who were in contradiction of euthanasia argued that the freedom to perform such an act could easily be misused. Religious association and specialty was the main aspects related with the disapproval of euthanasia.

Outline

1. Introduction:

1.  Introduce the topic:

1) The social history of Euthanasia.

2) Why it is a debatable topic?

3) What are the two types of Euthanasia?

1. Thesis statement:

1. Reveal the primary research question
2. Thesis statement

1. First Argument – Euthanasia will lead to the downfall in finding new cure to terminal diseases.

1. Looking at it deeply, Doctors have a major influence in the decision making part of euthanasia which may can be misused by corrupted Doctors or any other corrupted people who influence the doctors
2. It demotes the act of providing good care and treatment for the patients having terminal disease.

1. Second Argument – It weakens the sacredness of lives.

1) All lives matter, none of them are more important than any other. Legalizing Euthanasia means that some live are not worth living and hence can be taken away from people.

2) Looking from a religious point of view, most of the religions have the same opinion about Euthanasia that it is against the will of God so it is not permissible. Hence, practicing will be like denying the beliefs of a almost billion people.